Max Q wrote:

Pointless to have nosewheel brakes just to stop the wheels rotating prior to retraction, I think that’s a fairy tale


As stated that’s done with snubbers

That is NOT a fairy tale!! I've Changed enough of them to Know!
Though some airlines have removed the Nose wheel "snubbers" as a cost saving move

strfyr51 wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Pointless to have nosewheel brakes just to stop the wheels rotating prior to retraction, I think that’s a fairy tale


As stated that’s done with snubbers

That is NOT a fairy tale!! I've Changed enough of them to Know!
Though some airlines have removed the Nose wheel "snubbers" as a cost saving move

It appears to me that Max Q is speaking of hydraulic brakes.

Hi Caltech. From design point of view it’s very easy. An Hydraulic activated pad that act against a special plate fixed to Nose gear wheel interior.
When LG are selected up, small part from LG retraction hyd press, is deviated and goes to pad. Pad extend and hit the plate. Those friction stop wheel.a
Rgds

CALTECH wrote:

And Boeing does call them Spin Brakes. Can't remember what Airbus calls them, something like De-spin Brakes..

Our B757, B767 MEL's call them "Nose Wheel Spin Brakes (Snubbers)".
Our B747-400, B747-8 MEL's call them "Nose Wheel Snubber Pads".
Our MD11 MEL does not address them (strange), but the AMM calls them "Spin Brake Straps".
Our A300 MEL calls them "Nose Wheel Snubber Pad", but the AMM calls them "In-Flight Brake Bands".

And, for the record, none of our aircraft have a nose wheel hydraulic brakes installed. None.

CALTECH wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

CALTECH wrote:

Many airplanes have nose gear brakes to this day

Errrr no. Not true.

Can you name a few examples?

Errr yes. Very true.

KC-135, 727, 737, 757........

How do you think the nose wheels stop spinning after retraction ?

And Boeing does call them Spin Brakes. Can't remember what Airbus calls them, something like De-spin Brakes.

Back in 1985, took the nose gear hydraulic brakes off of the Air Micronesia birds as they came in for HMVs at LAXMX Base. Back then, it was weird seeing the nose gear without hydraulic brakes after we were done with the Mod..

As has been explained upthread, nose wheels are stopped on retraction by scrubbers.

Nose wheel brakes were an option on 727s ... an option few wanted and quickly removed. I don't think you can find a 757 with a nose wheel brake. Etc.

kitplane01 wrote:

As has been explained upthread, nose wheels are stopped on retraction by scrubbers.

Nose wheel brakes were an option on 727s ... an option few wanted and quickly removed. I don't think you can find a 757 with a nose wheel brake. Etc.

That appears to be the intent of the OP, as he mentioned take-off and landing performance, not what stops spinning wheels on retraction.

So, other than the 727 and Convair 880/990, has their been any transport airliners with nose wheel brakes?

[/quote]

fr8mech wrote:

CALTECH wrote:

And Boeing does call them Spin Brakes. Can't remember what Airbus calls them, something like De-spin Brakes..

Our B757, B767 MEL's call them "Nose Wheel Spin Brakes (Snubbers)".
Our B747-400, B747-8 MEL's call them "Nose Wheel Snubber Pads".
Our MD11 MEL does not address them (strange), but the AMM calls them "Spin Brake Straps".
Our A300 MEL calls them "Nose Wheel Snubber Pad", but the AMM calls them "In-Flight Brake Bands".

And, for the record, none of our aircraft have a nose wheel hydraulic brakes installed. None.

And for the record, none of our aircraft have nose gear hydraulic brakes installed. None.
And for the record we have airplanes with no hydraulic nose or main gear brakes installed. Supposed to be a cost saving measure.

Apprentice wrote:

Hi Caltech. From design point of view it’s very easy. An Hydraulic activated pad that act against a special plate fixed to Nose gear wheel interior.
When LG are selected up, small part from LG retraction hyd press, is deviated and goes to pad. Pad extend and hit the plate. Those friction stop wheel.a
Rgds

Hydraulic activated pads ? Pads extend hydraulically ? Those are new to my eyes......

Caltech, sorry, I will try again. These NLG brakes got same principle as an automobile’s fwd wheels brake. Only difference is, in auto, When You press Brake, You got every wheel braked.
On a plane, when You press “Brake”, You will have hyd press ONLY on Main Landing Gear, all of them, except when antiskid function for any brake is sending hyd pressure for this only brake to return.
When You select “Gear On”, with MLG Gnd / Air logic on Air, all Brakes will received also Hydraulic Pressure (a reduced value from full brake pressure) to stop all the main wheels before they enter to Main Wheel Well. This function is Automatic and not action from crew (besides Gear- Up) is required
Many big planes, have a similar system for Nose Landing Gear, I repeat, to reduce Wheel vibration before enterin wheel wells.
System is not new. Had been around for a long time.

Rgds

Sounds like a great idea, except AFAIK, except for the 727, no aircraft have any sort of hydraulic brakes on the nose gear. Also the spin stop feature on the main gear brakes is applied automatically when "gear up" is selected, not when gear off is selected.

Apprentice wrote:

Many big planes, have a similar system for Nose Landing Gear, I repeat, to reduce Wheel vibration before enterin wheel wells.
System is not new. Had been around for a long time.

Rgds

Tell us which “big planes” have hydraulic nose wheel brakes.

By the way, I’m pretty sure Caltech was having a little fun with you.

B727; Tu-154M; IL-62M, for the ones I had worked on ...

Apprentice wrote:

B727; Tu-154M; IL-62M, for the ones I had worked on ...

So, nothing modern. Just aircraft designed in the ‘60’s? And, the B727 dropped the option in later models.

Apprentice wrote:

B727; Tu-154M; IL-62M, for the ones I had worked on ...

Oh, O.K., you mean aircraft that have not been in production for many years and were never produced or operated outside of the Soviet Union or it's allies? With the ongoing state of soviet production and innovation, I could see aircraft that were designed with some pretty hilarious stone age concepts. With the B-727, it was realized early on that nose gear brakes were a really lame idea.

stratclub wrote:

. With the B-727, it was realized early on that nose gear brakes were a really lame idea.

"Lame" is a bit harsh. Nose wheel brakes were developed to improve the 727's performance on short runways -- to sell airplanes. They were also looked at for the 737 - to sell airplanes. Things changed, runways were lengthened/grooved or other airplanes were used so they became unnecessary on the 727 and weren't installed on the 737. Similarly, the first few 777's for Emirates had main gear brake cooling fans which in the end were not required but that doesn't make them a "lame" idea.

7BOEING7 wrote:

stratclub wrote:

. With the B-727, it was realized early on that nose gear brakes were a really lame idea.

"Lame" is a bit harsh. Nose wheel brakes were developed to improve the 727's performance on short runways -- to sell airplanes. They were also looked at for the 737 - to sell airplanes. Things changed, runways were lengthened/grooved or other airplanes were used so they became unnecessary on the 727 and weren't installed on the 737. Similarly, the first few 777's for Emirates had main gear brake cooling fans which in the end were not required but that doesn't make them a "lame" idea.

I think lame is the right word. Nose gear brakes were a marketing option that completely missed the mark with customers. If you figure that 95% of an aircrafts weight is on the mains, how could nose gear brakes make much difference other than the possibility of degrading nose gear steering?

The 767 had cooling fans as an option as well and did sell a few for the Japanese domestic market. It did help in giving customers the option of a faster turn around. So ya, not many carriers chose cooling fans. but at least some did and instead of deactivating them like almost all carriers did with nose gear brakes. Agreed. Brake cooling fans not lame.

stratclub wrote:

7BOEING7 wrote:

stratclub wrote:

. With the B-727, it was realized early on that nose gear brakes were a really lame idea.

"Lame" is a bit harsh. Nose wheel brakes were developed to improve the 727's performance on short runways -- to sell airplanes. They were also looked at for the 737 - to sell airplanes. Things changed, runways were lengthened/grooved or other airplanes were used so they became unnecessary on the 727 and weren't installed on the 737. Similarly, the first few 777's for Emirates had main gear brake cooling fans which in the end were not required but that doesn't make them a "lame" idea.

I think lame is the right word. Nose gear brakes were a marketing option that completely missed the mark with customers. If you figure that 95% of an aircrafts weight is on the mains, how could nose gear brakes make much difference other than the possibility of degrading nose gear steering?

The 767 had cooling fans as an option as well and did sell a few for the Japanese domestic market. It did help in giving customers the option of a faster turn around. So ya, not many carriers chose cooling fans. but at least some did and instead of deactivating them like almost all carriers did with nose gear brakes. Agreed. Brake cooling fans not lame.

Have to disagree



While nosewheel brakes weren’t a huge hit on the 727, in certain, specialized markets they were invaluable until those runways could be extended (if that was possible)


I’m referring specifically to Continental’s Air Micronesia B727 operation in its early days flying into short, remote island strips in the Pacific


A few of these runways started where the ocean ended and finished where it started again !


No room for error and maximum stopping power wasn’t just welcome it was essential, especially when it was wet

Max Q wrote:

stratclub wrote:

7BOEING7 wrote:

"Lame" is a bit harsh. Nose wheel brakes were developed to improve the 727's performance on short runways -- to sell airplanes. They were also looked at for the 737 - to sell airplanes. Things changed, runways were lengthened/grooved or other airplanes were used so they became unnecessary on the 727 and weren't installed on the 737. Similarly, the first few 777's for Emirates had main gear brake cooling fans which in the end were not required but that doesn't make them a "lame" idea.

I think lame is the right word. Nose gear brakes were a marketing option that completely missed the mark with customers. If you figure that 95% of an aircrafts weight is on the mains, how could nose gear brakes make much difference other than the possibility of degrading nose gear steering?

The 767 had cooling fans as an option as well and did sell a few for the Japanese domestic market. It did help in giving customers the option of a faster turn around. So ya, not many carriers chose cooling fans. but at least some did and instead of deactivating them like almost all carriers did with nose gear brakes. Agreed. Brake cooling fans not lame.

Have to disagree



While nosewheel brakes weren’t a huge hit on the 727, in certain, specialized markets they were invaluable until those runways could be extended (if that was possible)


I’m referring specifically to Continental’s Air Micronesia B727 operation in its early days flying into short, remote island strips in the Pacific


A few of these runways started where the ocean ended and finished where it started again !


No room for error and maximum stopping power wasn’t just welcome it was essential, especially when it was wet

I'll concede to your example. Air Mike sure must have been a whole different world back in the day. We did phase C-checks in Everett Wa. on 2 of those birds (B727-100's). Lot's of corrosion on those airplanes. It was 1985 and by then if they ever had nose brakes, they were removed leaving just the mounting provisions. (Can't Remember)

Air Mike N18476 many years before we saw her.

Great picture SC


Those old -100’s were creaky to say the least


As a brand new FE I did not enjoy working the ‘panel’ on those and dreaded the sight of that oval
number two inlet


Problem was the pressurization, unlike the reliable, automatic system on the -200 the -100 was all manual and it was a bitch to operate smoothly with no pressure bumps



This prompted lots of disapproving looks from the Captain


I never did master that technique, I’ve done six legs in a day on the -200 operating in manual (DC) and soon got the hang of it but I was glad when they retired the old -100s


Although I did get to fly it in the right seat for a while and it was a delight, very light on the controls and responsive despite their age


The 100’s were practically museum pieces by the time I started with CAL in 1987


Those two first Air Mike birds were known as ‘Nu Ju’ and ‘Ju Ju’

Max Q wrote:

Problem was the pressurization, unlike the reliable, automatic system on the -200 the -100 was all manual and it was a bitch to operate smoothly with no pressure bumps

At the red tail company, most of our 200s still had manual pressurization. Only some we got from Republic had the auto. But you're right on the management. When the window seaters pushed up the power for TO, the technic was to momentarily open the outflow valve(s)? to help compensate for the pressure bump. I never mastered it either. And on topic, NW never had nosewheel brakes either, at least in my era.

Max Q wrote:

Those two first Air Mike birds were known as ‘Nu Ju’ and ‘Ju Ju’

A flight mechanic came along with one of those planes and told us the nick names Nu Ju and Ju Ju were given to the aircraft by the locals because of the compressor stall sounds 727's sometimes make at idle thrust when the aircraft is on the ground and there is a crosswind component.

As an aside, the same mechanic told us he was a flight mechanic and flew with the aircraft so we asked him, what do you do for tools? He said I bring my own and proceed to fetch his tool box from the airplane and opened it up and the tools in it were so rusted they looked to be unusable.

Hi: For a medium plane nose gear wheel, if snubbers will be used, wheels will keep rotating all gear up procces, till nlg is almost up and lock.One of brake system, +; in both main and nose gear is that brakes activates and wheels stop as soon as Landing Gear start wheel up process start.
Vibration is a problem because, at begining of flight, there is not enough air speed for control airplane..
Using brake pads allow also for less strict wheel balance and R/R process.

Rgds

Apprentice wrote:

Hi: For a medium plane nose gear wheel, if snubbers will be used, wheels will keep rotating all gear up procces, till nlg is almost up and lock.One of brake system, +; in both main and nose gear is that brakes activates and wheels stop as soon as Landing Gear start wheel up process start.
Vibration is a problem because, at begining of flight, there is not enough air speed for control airplane..
Using brake pads allow also for less strict wheel balance and R/R process.

Rgds

Ok, last time...no* modern air transport category aircraft uses nose wheel brakes. The nose wheels are stopped by the snubbers/straps/pads/bands. That's it. You do not want a rotating mass inside the wheel wells, so you stop the nose wheels with the aforementioned snubbers.

*a proviso because there are really no absolutes in aviation. Maybe, there's a modern air transport category aircraft that has them...I haven't seen them all.

Apprentice wrote:

Using brake pads allow also for less strict wheel balance and R/R process.

Yeah, find that in the AMM for me, will you?

Even the 4-wheeled NLG on the C-5 used snubbers In well to spot nosewheel rotation. The mains had reduced pressure 150psi, IIRC, on the mains. If spin down didn’t occur or the retraction brake was inop, wait two minutes before retracting the gear.

GF

fr8mech, Good Evening, in our companies we do not keep AMM, we can take for public use and of course, they are not a Manual for Students. They do not explain a lot.But You always can make Yourself a question: why they ues this system on those planes? Answer ...
Rgds

(We can’t take for public use). Sorry
Rgds

Hi: There is a small difference when plane brakes using pads (steel against steel surface) than snubbers that help to worn out those wheels quickly.
Rgds

Apprentice wrote:

You always can make Yourself a question: why they ues this system on those planes? Answer ...
Rgds

Well, if we're guessing, then I'll let you know, that stopping the nose wheels from spinning is not a matter of vibration, it is a matter of not having a rapidly rotating mass inside of an enclosed area, in close proximity to hydraulics and right below the flight deck.

RetiredWeasel wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Problem was the pressurization, unlike the reliable, automatic system on the -200 the -100 was all manual and it was a bitch to operate smoothly with no pressure bumps

At the red tail company, most of our 200s still had manual pressurization. Only some we got from Republic had the auto. But you're right on the management. When the window seaters pushed up the power for TO, the technic was to momentarily open the outflow valve(s)? to help compensate for the pressure bump. I never mastered it either. And on topic, NW never had nosewheel brakes either, at least in my era.

I did not know any -200s had manual pressurization but now I remember reading
NW specified that controller for commonality with their older -100 aircraft
and the savings that allowed them


Is there any truth to that ?


Btw glad to hear I wasn’t the only one that didn’t master that manual controller !

stratclub wrote:

Max Q wrote:

Those two first Air Mike birds were known as ‘Nu Ju’ and ‘Ju Ju’

A flight mechanic came along with one of those planes and told us the nick names Nu Ju and Ju Ju were given to the aircraft by the locals because of the compressor stall sounds 727's sometimes make at idle thrust when the aircraft is on the ground and there is a crosswind component.

As an aside, the same mechanic told us he was a flight mechanic and flew with the aircraft so we asked him, what do you do for tools? He said I bring my own and proceed to fetch his tool box from the airplane and opened it up and the tools in it were so rusted they looked to be unusable.

Great stuff, love these kind of stories and
the background they give us


The mechanics ‘tool box’ doesn’t surprise me !

Max Q wrote:

I did not know any -200s had manual pressurization but now I remember reading
NW specified that controller for commonality with their older -100 aircraft
and the savings that allowed them


Is there any truth to that ?


Btw glad to hear I wasn’t the only one that didn’t master that manual controller !

Very true at NW!! IIRC, all the 100, 200 and 200A had manual controllers. It wasn't until the RC purchase that an auto pressurization 727 entered the fleet. One good thing about NW was they went out of their way to ensure cockpit standardization. As much as possible, any used aircraft purchased was configured to be as close as possible to the NW specs. The 727 is a good example, some were purchased that had auto pressurization. That was removed for a manual system. Lavern and Shirly (747-100) were completely reconfigured so the cockpits were identical to original build NW aircraft.

mmo wrote:

Max Q wrote:

I did not know any -200s had manual pressurization but now I remember reading
NW specified that controller for commonality with their older -100 aircraft
and the savings that allowed them


Is there any truth to that ?


Btw glad to hear I wasn’t the only one that didn’t master that manual controller !

Very true at NW!! IIRC, all the 100, 200 and 200A had manual controllers. It wasn't until the RC purchase that an auto pressurization 727 entered the fleet. One good thing about NW was they went out of their way to ensure cockpit standardization. As much as possible, any used aircraft purchased was configured to be as close as possible to the NW specs. The 727 is a good example, some were purchased that had auto pressurization. That was removed for a manual system. Lavern and Shirly (747-100) were completely reconfigured so the cockpits were identical to original build NW aircraft.

Interesting, I’ve heard a few stories about
the penny pinching at NW so I’ll ask another


Was it true the headquarters building in MSP had no windows to save $ and avoid
employee distractions ?



That manual pressurization controller on the 72 was a pita


The automatic version on most ! 200s was
really good, effortless to set up, user friendly and good redundancy with Auto, standby and AC and DC manual control as a back up


I believe a similar controller is still in use on the 737

Max Q wrote:

[

Interesting, I’ve heard a few stories about
the penny pinching at NW so I’ll ask another


Was it true the headquarters building in MSP had no windows to save $ and avoid
employee distractions ?

Very, very true!! The old HQ, located at MSP attached to the hangar complex on 30L did not have windows!! Donald Nyrop was an extremely frugal CEO and he drove a hard bargain. Back in his day, NW was known as "Cobra Airlines, always ready to strike". But he had a lot of clout with McD and Boeing. The DC-10-40 was originally designated the DC-10-20 but he wanted the latest version and AA had ordered the -30, so McD changed the model to finalize the order. There are countless stories about his penny-pinching ways. However, while saving money his habits also led to the LBO of NW. The entire LBO was paid for by sale/leasebacks, stock churning and foreign equity. But, that's another story.

I always like the story about bidding by call-in based on your seniority number and using boards. Nyrop was famous for arguing with GE on an engine buy, “I like GE, I always buy their lightbulbs”.

GF

mmo wrote:

Max Q wrote:

[

Interesting, I’ve heard a few stories about
the penny pinching at NW so I’ll ask another


Was it true the headquarters building in MSP had no windows to save $ and avoid
employee distractions ?

Very, very true!! The old HQ, located at MSP attached to the hangar complex on 30L did not have windows!! Donald Nyrop was an extremely frugal CEO and he drove a hard bargain. Back in his day, NW was known as "Cobra Airlines, always ready to strike". But he had a lot of clout with McD and Boeing. The DC-10-40 was originally designated the DC-10-20 but he wanted the latest version and AA had ordered the -30, so McD changed the model to finalize the order. There are countless stories about his penny-pinching ways. However, while saving money his habits also led to the LBO of NW. The entire LBO was paid for by sale/leasebacks, stock churning and foreign equity. But, that's another story.

Interesting, I also read that for many years
NW would not finance their aircraft, always
paying up front in cash


Not sure how true that is, they were known as frugal, that’s why that leveraged buy out was a big surprise but considering that era
of corporate raiders I guess it shouldn’t have been

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I always like the story about bidding by call-in based on your seniority number and using boards. Nyrop was famous for arguing with GE on an engine buy, “I like GE, I always buy their lightbulbs”.

GF

Fascinating


I remember putting in my monthly bid on a handwritten sheet of paper, along with all other pilots !


Someone had a fun job sorting that out


I still had better luck with my schedule then
than with pbs !

I have been reading A-net for ten years and a member for a couple. I love this forum because it's just so darned interesting.

Apprentice, kind request: please stop posting here. Almost everything you write is complete and utter rubbish - even when it's a subject I am not knowledgable on its obvious you don't know what you are talking about so please stop wasting everyone's time.

Either that or please listen to those who actually know and learn yourself.

I understand why knowledgable members move on.

Rant over
No doubt this post will be deleted but it needs saying.

chimborazo wrote:

I have been reading A-net for ten years and a member for a couple. I love this forum because it's just so darned interesting.

Apprentice, kind request: please stop posting here. Almost everything you write is complete and utter rubbish - even when it's a subject I am not knowledgable on its obvious you don't know what you are talking about so please stop wasting everyone's time.

Either that or please listen to those who actually know and learn yourself.

I understand why knowledgable members move on.

Rant over
No doubt this post will be deleted but it needs saying.

Kinda of harsh, really. Clearly, language is an issue with Apprentice. I have no problem with trying to understand his point of view. This is a great opportunity to understand how aviation happens in places and cultures we are not familiar with. The reason why Americans are so universally hated is because if they don't understand someones point of view, they insult it and deem it as not relevant.

Good for Americans. I'm English.

The point is that this is a factual forum not a point of view form. Regardless of language ability and delivery, when nonsense is written it should be called out as such.

Many of the "greats" of A-net have moved on because there's something about the internet that makes folk with a little bit of knowledge fundamentally refuse to accept facts from those that know.

chimborazo wrote:

Good for Americans. I'm English.

The point is that this is a factual forum not a point of view form. Regardless of language ability and delivery, when nonsense is written it should be called out as such.

Many of the "greats" of A-net have moved on because there's something about the internet that makes folk with a little bit of knowledge fundamentally refuse to accept facts from those that know.

I’d say it’s a point of view forum with some
facts, there are very knowledgeable contributors that over time it becomes obvious they know their stuff


Others, not so much

Max Q wrote:

69bug wrote:

Interesting.. so the left pedal operates the left brakes and the right pedal operates the right wheel brakes... how does the nosewheel brake come on/off?

bug

Good question, I asked the same about the center bogie brakes on the DC10 / MD11
and A340 / 300/ 600

Rh pedal control RH wheel and Left pedal, Lh wheel

Nose wheel brakes are not activate while braking a/c (to stop it)
Brakes are using , while NLG is raising, to Stop wheel rotation, thus reducing vibration.
As already indicated, this is automatic braking, activated whith a/c on “air” and nose landing Gear” up”

Rgds

Chimborazo, Good Morning, sorry, lack of time I had not pay attention to Your post concerning my knowledge..
I post time by time, while there is a post about something I had been dealing with, because, I supposed that giving my point of view, will help others to understand.
Sorry about my english level, it is not my mother langauge and had noting to do with language used to studied aviation.. There is not a blog as good as aviation.net neither in spanish nor in russian, and, I love to talk about planes and it’s maintenance.
I supose that You have a great experience in any field related to aeronautics, me, I only have 6 years studing aircraft maintenance (master degree) and , since 1984, working on different a/c heavy and line maintenance, firts in several russian made ones (TU-154, IL-62, An-24; IL-18) then on western planes since 1993.(DC-10-30, B757; 747, 767, 777, Airbus A320, A330, A340), and most of this was as a “maintenance provider” working for several companies, mostly European. I’m human, I may be wrong, but I tried to post about what I had seen and what I had practice on.

Appreciate any comments. As always, when I encounter a person with a deeper knoweledge in any field, I made silence to better listen to him. I will try to refrain for posting, in view off Your knoweledge, and by the way, may We know what it is?
Thanks
Rgds

FWIW, the electro-pneumatic pressurization controller was first introduced on the B707-320 series and quickly followed by the 727-200. A huge improvement over the existing purely pneumatic systems employed up to that time. Required little attention to keep the ears from bleeding.

Hi Apprentice, thanks for your comments.

I am engineering manager at a company that designs and builds industrial food production equipment. I have an interest in aviation - especially the technical side. And PPL as a hobby.

I have no specific aeronautical training except for the tiny amount required for EASA PPL. I know A LOT about engineering in my field (and some others). But you know what... it's a tiny, tiny, tiny bit of the actual knowledge that is out there. So I would not assume experience (no matter how deep or broad) meant I was correct on every subject. I'm on this thread to learn.

I have an ability to listen to others - especially when they display a far superior knowledge to me - in any field. Language ability is irrelevant - I have lived and worked in over 40 countries around the world and worked at many levels of ability with locals. If I don't understand someone's meaning I ask for clarification. When someone is posting "their opinion" (repeatedly and based on incorrect facts) and is corrected by members who have evidenced over a long period that they do indeed know what they are talking about, the poster should take note.

You state: "Appreciate any comments. As always, when I encounter a person with a deeper knoweledge in any field, I made silence to better listen to him". You have in fact done quite the opposite throughout this thread.

As Judge Judy (an intriguing weakness of mine) often says: "you've not got your listening ears on".

Too many members I have learned from and respected over the years have left this board because of the inability of some to understand they are wrong/they need more knowledge on a subject but continue to want to make "their opinion" be heard as the correct one.

And to All : apologies for hi-jacking the thread. It's very telling that the most interesting and knowedgeable posters left here (many commenting on this thread) are also the ones who often say"oh, I didn't know that, that;s interesting, so what about such and such... please expand"

Moder airliners don't have nose wheel brakes. In fact, not every modern airliner (A380) has brakes on every MLG wheel...

Apprentice wrote:

Max Q wrote:

69bug wrote:

Interesting.. so the left pedal operates the left brakes and the right pedal operates the right wheel brakes... how does the nosewheel brake come on/off?

bug

Good question, I asked the same about the center bogie brakes on the DC10 / MD11
and A340 / 300/ 600

Rh pedal control RH wheel and Left pedal, Lh wheel

Nose wheel brakes are not activate while braking a/c (to stop it)
Brakes are using , while NLG is raising, to Stop wheel rotation, thus reducing vibration.
As already indicated, this is automatic braking, activated whith a/c on “air” and nose landing Gear” up”

Rgds

Those 2 statements seem to conflict could you explain more?

Your last statement I would assume to mean nose gear brakes are activated when aircraft is in air mode and gear handle is selected to gear up. My opinion on stopping wheel rotation prior to the gear entering the wheel well is to prevent FOD from being flung into the wheel well and if the tire is damaged, and off balanced, reducing vibration prior to the wheels entering the the wheel wells would be a good additional benefit..

As an aside, early B-737's had tire burst screens in the main wheel well for aircraft that operated from gravel runways.

Statclub high, No, bad asumption, since pilots release brakes (except some small correction at the begining) brakes are not activated till a/c is back on ground firmly.
Moreover, in most of planes (so far talking only about MLG), when amaortizator extend and take a weight-off-the-wheels position, do not allow brake press from the pedals to “go” to brakes, thus avoiding a subsequent landing with a wheel braked.

The need to brake wheels when landing gear is in transit, is, I repeat, to stop wheels, BEFORE they entere in wheel wells, for that what is used is another hydraulic pressure, coming from Gear up hyd system and diverted (some pressure) to brake wheels while in transit.

Rgds

Chimborazo, Good Evening. Back to technical issues, which a/c are (is) in your “modern category”

Rgds

Apprentice wrote:

Max Q wrote:

69bug wrote:

Interesting.. so the left pedal operates the left brakes and the right pedal operates the right wheel brakes... how does the nosewheel brake come on/off?

bug

Good question, I asked the same about the center bogie brakes on the DC10 / MD11
and A340 / 300/ 600

Rh pedal control RH wheel and Left pedal, Lh wheel

Nose wheel brakes are not activate while braking a/c (to stop it)
Brakes are using , while NLG is raising, to Stop wheel rotation, thus reducing vibration.
As already indicated, this is automatic braking, activated whith a/c on “air” and nose landing Gear” up”

Rgds

I was watching JustPlanes Concorde's video last evening.
There was an extensive explanation about the front wheels brakes.
IIRC only one wheel is equipped with a brake disc ( the right one ) the other being equipped with a motor, being part of the antiskid system, but I don't remember very well the explanation, I have to watch it again.
As I've understood, it wasn't automatically operated, but manually. And btw, it was only to stop the rotation, not to stop the airplane.

Fat cat, good evening, I had not seen this tv show, but i also believ You understand it correct.
On airplanes, everything is calculated and optimized. Nose LG is calculated , beside normal loads, for “heavy nose landing incident”, this loads, axials, are perpendiculars to (in case of) brake forces, making NLG strut very hevy, is they intent to use NLG as a normal brakes wheels.. Only when NLG strut is in de air and longiyudinal forces go to “0”, is that those brakes are activre

Rgds